Title
Ordillo vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 93054
Decision Date
Dec 4, 1990
A plebiscite approved CAR only in Ifugao; SC ruled a single province cannot constitute an autonomous region, nullifying related government actions.
multiple constituent units
plebiscite
provinces

Case Summary (G.R. No. 93054)

Factual Background

On January 30, 1990, a plebiscite was held pursuant to Republic Act No. 6766 to determine creation of a Cordillera Autonomous Region and which of the enumerated provinces and city would comprise it. The official returns showed that only the province of Ifugao voted in favor by a majority of 5,889 votes, while the other provinces and Baguio City overwhelmingly rejected the Organic Act by 148,676 votes. On February 14, 1990, the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 2259 stating that the Organic Act had been approved by a majority of the votes in Ifugao only. The Secretary of Justice issued a memorandum the same date concluding that, under the proviso in Section 13(A) of Republic Act No. 6766, the province of Ifugao being the only province voting favorably could alone legally and validly constitute the Cordillera Autonomous Region.

Immediate Administrative Responses

Prior to and following the COMELEC resolution, the Executive Secretary issued a memorandum dated February 5, 1990 granting authority to wind up the affairs of the Cordillera Executive Board and the Cordillera Regional Assembly created under Executive Order No. 220. Congress enacted Republic Act No. 6861 on March 8, 1990 scheduling elections for the Cordillera Autonomous Region on the first Monday of March 1991. On March 30, 1990, the President issued Administrative Order No. 160, which declared the Cordillera Executive Board, Cordillera Regional Assembly, and offices created under Executive Order No. 220 abolished in view of the ratification of the Organic Act.

Petitioners' Claims and Relief Sought

On March 9, 1990, petitioners filed a petition with COMELEC to declare non-ratification of the Organic Act; COMELEC merely noted the petition. Petitioners then brought this action asking the Court to declare null and void COMELEC Resolution No. 2259, the February 14, 1990 memorandum of the Secretary of Justice, the February 5, 1990 memorandum of the Executive Secretary, Administrative Order No. 160, and Republic Act No. 6861, and to enjoin respondents from implementing them and from spending public funds for that purpose. Petitioners also prayed that Executive Order No. 220 be declared still in force and effect until another organic law is enacted by Congress and duly ratified by the voters in the constituent units.

Respondents' Position and the Abbas Precedent

Respondents, through their comments, treated the COMELEC returns and the Secretary of Justice opinion as establishing that the Organic Act became effective upon approval by the majority of votes cast in the province of Ifugao. The Secretary of Justice relied on this Court’s decision in Abbas, et al. v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 89651, November 10, 1989) to interpret the phrase “by majority of the votes cast by the constituent units called for the purpose,” concluding that the Constitution requires a simple majority in each constituent unit and that a single constituent unit voting favorably sufficed to validate inclusion and thus could operate as the Autonomous Region under a proviso in Section 13(A) of Republic Act No. 6766.

Issue Presented

The dispositive issue before the Court was whether the province of Ifugao, acting alone, could legally and validly constitute the Cordillera Autonomous Region under Art. X, Sec. 15, 1987 Constitution and Republic Act No. 6766.

Court’s Legal Analysis: Constitutional Text and Ordinary Meaning

The Court examined Art. X, Sec. 15, 1987 Constitution, noting the provision contemplates creation of autonomous regions “consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas,” and held that the disjunctive terms connote a composition of more than one constituent unit. The Court applied the rule of statutory construction that constitutional language is to be given its ordinary meaning, and concluded that the term “region” in ordinary use implies two or more provinces. The Court observed that administrative regions created for governance are groupings of contiguous provinces and that Ifugao as a single province could not alone form a region in the sense intended by the Constitution.

Court’s Analysis: Object and Provisions of Republic Act No. 6766

The Court considered Republic Act No. 6766 and found its provisions presupposed a multi-unit autonomous region. The statute established a Regional Government exercising powers over all provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays within the Autonomous Region. The Court reasoned that if only Ifugao comprised the region, the statute would unrealistically create overlapping executive and legislative authorities, producing concurrent provincial and regional officers with coextensive jurisdiction over a small territory. The Court noted specific statutory structures that assumed multiple constituent units: legislative representation in a Cordillera Assembly apportioned among provinces and cities; a Regional Planning and Development Board composed of the Cordillera Governor, all provincial governors and city mayors or their representatives, two members of the Cordillera Assembly, and representatives of the private sector; a Regional Commission on Appointments requiring members from different provinces and cities; and expectations for regional cabinet composition, tribal courts for various indigenous cultural communities, and development of a common regional language. The Court observed that funding provision of “Ten Million Pesos (P10,000,000,00)” in Article XXI, Section 13(B)(c) for initial organizational requirements could not reasonably be confined to funding a lone small province.

Practical and Demographic Considerations

The Court emphasized practical and demographic realities. Ifugao comprised only 11% of the population of the areas enumerated in Article I, Section 2(b) of Republic Act No. 6766, and it was the second smallest in population among the group. The Court concluded that many statutory offices and boards would be functionally impossible or absurd if applied to a single-province region, such as achieving quorums, appointing cabinet members “as far as practicable” from various provinces and cities, and organizing tribal courts and language development initiatives intended to embrace diverse cultural groups.

Distinguishing Abbas and Scope of Its Holding

The Court distinguished Abbas, et al. v. COMELEC by explaining that Abbas addressed the meaning of “majority” in determining w

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.

About Privacy Terms